Yes, I know this, but how many H-1B employees do you know who have made the successful transition?

I know it happens, but it's an incredibly stressful event for the employee in question and there is actually no guarantee that it will succeed considering the temperamental nature of the INS and the unnecessarily small pool of companies willing to go through the trouble of sponsoring a worker already in the US.

I was personally involved in the sponsorship of one Indian employee who had gotten their doctorate from a top US Ivy school, and yet the INS still delayed the visa unnecessarily by an extra year. Thankfully, that person was living in India at the time and my company could afford to wait for the paperwork to finally settle, but imagine if that person had been already living in the US, or if my company had been less patient.

I guess one could try to say the same thing about employment in general. There is actually no guarantee of a job for anyone, even for US workers, but my point is that the constraints are completely different when you're under an existing H1B visa.

And my comparison with indentured servitude is still just as valid. After all, indentured servants in Colonial America were still free to find new employers, assuming those new employers bought out their original contract.

Even the workers on H1B know the real reason for the H1B program.

After all, they're not idiots. They realize that the H1B program was designed to prevent them from leaving their original H1B sponsor, than staying in the country working for a different US-based employer, so this guarantees them that they have very little negotiating power when it comes to negotiating salary increases, or negotiating for better working conditions.

This works the same way indentured servitude used to work for immigrants two hundred years ago. Except now, there is no need to hold a financial note over one's head, in exchange to have paid for their trip, now the builtin limitations of the H1B visa fulfill that purpose instead.

Everybody knows, the symbolic pregnancy test for the anti-Christ is still the most accurate scientific indicator for doomsday. At least, the result of that test is binary. Either someone is pregnant with the anti-Christ, or no one is pregnant with the anti-Christ. Thus far, the result has been "no anti-Christ yet", which tracks pretty well with most sonograms we know about.

5 minutes on the doomsday clock? What the hell does that even mean? Does it mean we only have 5 minutes left to live? or fifty years? or an additional five thousand years? The claim isn't even falsifiable, since it's not anchored to any specific meaning whatsoever.

Assuming police officers are as good at reading inter-office emails as I am, there is really only one piece of advice I'd give people.

Prepare yourself and prepare your home for imminent Swat arrival. Give away the dog (if you have one). Evict your roommate (if you have one). Keep all the doors to the outside wide open (so that they don't break them). Keep some fresh coffee in the pot and some fresh cookies on the table (so that the Swat team doesn't get low blood sugar and cranky by the time it reaches your bedroom). And sleep with handcuffs already on (so that they don't think you're trying to resist arrest). Also, it probably wouldn't hurt to pepper your walls leading to your bedroom with portraits of Ronald Reagan, George Bush, and Dick Cheney.

May be, he's right. He criticizes pharmaceutical companies both in China and in India, and his own company manufactures antibiotics in China. If his own company is having this problem of not being able to enforce proper procedures in China, I would tend to trust the guy, after all he's the CEO of that company.

And you actually believe that?

Many times, patches are just punted to QA even thought the developer knows full well that they're not going to pass QA. After all, I should know, I'm a software developer myself. Also, I can tell you that finishing the last 10% of a project is always the hardest part. May be it's because we naturally like to work on the easiest parts of a problem first, or may be it's because we don't actually start understanding the real requirements until we're almost finished with the project (therefore possibly requiring us to start all over from scratch), but whatever the reason is, I can tell you that a feature sitting in QA doesn't necessarily mean that it's almost finished, or anywhere close to finished.

Actually, no. The title doesn't make much sense. The title and summary should really have said:

Well, technically, they're passing on the information to the OEMs, so they're passing the buck.

Also not to sound like a Google fan-boy, but I'm not sure how you would know that a flaw with a WebView is indeed a "gaping security flaw". The article doesn't seem to be much help in that regard. Also, I'm not sure how the first story about Microsoft is even relevant to this latest story, unless the Microsoft PR department is behind these two narratives in the first place.

Ok, I stand corrected on the hire-for licence, but I've got to disagree with the following.

I never said that Uber was required to have that insurance, I'm just saying that Uber covers the drivers/owners of the car with its own commercial coverage while they are driving and logged into the application on their phone.

Thank you very much for proving that I actually did my research, as the first result in your search results is the exact same link I already provided in the post you're replied to.

I personally can't. I don't live in the same city where I work.

I've voted with my feet. It's too bad my workplace hasn't followed suit.

No, Uber drivers are not uninsured. Uber gives them commercial coverage (for when they are logged into the application). Please do your research before spouting misinformation.

Or it could just be an automatic response of the system. If a person files for a refund enough times, that person may automatically be banned by the system. After all, this is how other systems handle similar issues.

What are those?

The fact that you're mentioning "commercial insurance" only proves to me that you don't think Uber has any, or that Uber hasn't even tried to comply with the required insurance in Australia.

The fact that you've spelled "license" the American way, instead of the Australian way, and the fact that I couldn't find the Australian "commercial licen[c/s]e"as you called it makes me think that Australians use a different label/designation for commercial licences than Americans usually do.

Please cite your sources. I'm not disputing what you're saying. I just want to get my news from a slightly more reliable source than what some American guy on Slashdot thinks about the subject.

It's actually all part of their new freemium strategy. They give away their junior dictionary for free, or for below cost. But then, when the kid really needs to find a word like "forest" because the kid has actually no idea what a "forest" is outside the context of Minecraft, and the school purposefully makes him read completely outdated tree-hugging communist manifestos from long dead authors that may contain the word "forest" in them, then the parent feels naturally obligated to upgrade to the next version.